A Settler's blog

I have taken to reading blogs of various individuals involved somehow in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.  This Blogger in particular is very active, and writes about things from a Jewish Settler's perspective in Samaria.  His passionate statements sometimes over-exaggerate truth... like we are all prone to do in conflict.  I wrote a comment on his blog on one of these occasions... and it's turned into quite a dialogue.  See here.  

I would encourage you to read from all perspectives... even those with whom you don't agree.  It not only helps us know how to pray, but deepens our understanding of the issues at the center of conflict.  The exchange so far:

Anonymous (this is me ;) said...

I really enjoy your posts, I want to maintain a balanced perspective as one who works among Muslim Arabs, and have learned much about the Israeli perspective from you. I think it's important to see and listen to both sides of the conflict.
It is disappointing when either side distorts 'truth' especially objectively verifiable things like the contents of the Qur'an. Indeed Jerusalem is mentioned several times in the Qur'an, see http://islam.about.com/od/jerusalem/a/quds.htm.
I am an Evangelical Christian and am trying to balance a conviction for Israel's right to exist, and the need for justice and peace for Palestinians.
I urge you to not let your convictions lead you to over exaggerate, and mis-state truth. Peace is possible, but truth, fairness, compromise and the cessation of 'demonizing' enemies is necessary from both parties before this is possible.
With warm regards,
Dale Edwin
www.outercourtbook.com

YMedad said...

Sorry, but no Jerusalem is mentioned in the Koran. Check again.

And read this page, all of it and especially Daniel Pipes' article, Source

Anonymous said...

Try 2:142-144 and 17:1. References to the change in prayer from Jerusalem to Mecca (Muslims were copying Jews at the time in their direction of prayer) and the story of the Miraj. If you are looking for the word 'Jerusalem'... you're right not there. But there are clearly references to it.

 

YMedad said...

Try this:

Egyptian Ministry of Culture Publication: The Al-Aqsa Mosque and Dome of the Rock were Built to Divert The Pilgrimage from Mecca; Jerusalem was Not the Center of Worship for the Followers of the Prophet Muhammad

On August 5, 2003 Ahmad Muhammad 'Arafa, a columnist for the Egyptian weekly Al-Qahira, which is published by the Egyptian Ministry of Culture, wrote an article rejecting the established Islamic doctrine that the Prophet Muhammad's celebrated "Night Journey" (Koran 17:1) took him from Mecca to Jerusalem. 'Arafa, presenting a new analysis of the Koranic text, asserts that the Night Journey in Surat Al-Isra' (that is, "the Sura of the Night Journey") in the Koran does not refer to a miraculous journey from Mecca to Jerusalem, but to the Prophet's emigration (Hijra) from Mecca to Medina

YMedad said...

See here.

And this

as well as this

Anonymous said...

All interesting sources, thank you, will read.
Of course, you post sources that all written by Jews, with the exception of the Egyptian reference, whose theories are marginal and not accepted in mainstream Islam. Point is this: for the overwhelming majority of Muslims, and Muslim scholars, the above references in the Qur'an have meant Jerusalem for over a thousand years.
It still stands as a holy city for Jews, Muslims and Christians, for mostly the same reasons. To try and make the case that it shouldn't be holy or important to any one of those groups (or less important to some than others) is simply irresponsible. To disallow Islam's claim as 'a myth' is similar to Iran denying the Holocaust... it's baseless, irresponsible and doesn't further peace. Do you honestly think you are going to change Islam's mind that Jerusalem shouldn't be holy to them?
We need balance and fairness, not the destruction of each sides moral or legal case for Jerusalem. We don't even have to agree... we just need to figure out a way to live in peace given the current circumstances. Sorry, but I don't think this kind of dialogue helps that along, hence my 1st comment.
Again thanks for your references.
Dale

YMedad said...

Dale,

"Myth" or not, I don't care if the Muslims believe if Muhammed flew to Mecca on a winged horse and that the Koran details that. I do care if that is historically true. The Koran does not mention Jerusalem, a city that existed at the time and had been for some 2000 years previously. Odd that, no?

And if you accept that as a basis for contemporary political arrangements or what, what's then wrong with the Jewish belief, myth or archeological-proven fact that two Temples existed there long before Islam and Christianity and that, at the very least, the right of Jews to pray there in a corner, and be allowed at certain hours of the day to walk about with a Bible should be supported by all, especially Evangelical Christians. Well?

Anonymous said...

Taking a similar posture then, I shouldn't 'care' that Jews (and incidentally myself as a Christian) believe God spoke to Abraham to stop the sacrifice of his son at the location of the temple mount.
I trust you would extend me the courtesy of my belief as a Christian that Jesus of Nazareth was crucified, died and was buried and then rose again, near Jerusalem. I believe both because of historical evidence, and on the basis of testimony given by many down through the ages in addition to my personal experience in living out these truths. My belief is grounded in compelling evidence after careful study, but in the end boils down to faith. I respect others who hold differing opinions, but their attacking the evidence that supports my faith-belief does not shake it.
I do care deeply what Jews believe, (and Muslims and Christians) because belief precedes passion and conviction, whether or not historically verifiable. It is held very passionately by over a billion Muslims that Jerusalem is a holy city... because of what's written in the Qur'an. Arguing with that is completely unproductive and pointless.

As to your second statement, point well made. I fully agree that Jews, Christians and Muslims should have access to the site. I understand the historical facts and archeological evidence and 'believe' that there were two temples there. I have visited but due to tensions at the time, could not go up to the mount. Thankfully the Jewish authorities allowed our visit to the tunnels and Western Wall, which I very much enjoyed.
I am not trying to take sides. In fact, with my Muslim friends, I often advocate for an understanding of the Jewish perspective. Their claims are many times inflammatory and unproductive.
Fight fair... If you don't want others distorting the historical veracity of your beliefs to make their point, don't stoop to that level in your arguments. Differing interpretation is completely acceptable, but I think the article you posted steps over that line.

YMedad said...

You have my full curtesy, for sure, for your beliefs. But remind me, what historical evidence is there about the story of Jesus' crucifiction?

And I fail to comprehend this: "Fight fair... If you don't want others distorting the historical veracity of your beliefs to make their point, don't stoop to that level in your arguments."

All I said was that there is a great doubt if the site of Al-Aksa is Jerusalem.

Versus these:

The Mufti of Jerusalem, Sheikh Sabri, has said: “The Al-Buraq Wall [Western Wall] and its plaza are a Muslim religious property, and the Israeli government’s decisions do not affect it. . . . The Al-Buraq Wall is part of the Al Aqsa Mosque. The Jews have no relation to it” (Al Ayam, Nov. 22, 1997).

Walid Awad, director of Foreign Publications for the PLO's Palestine Ministry of Information, said in an IMRA interview Dec. 25, 1996: “There is no tangible evidence of Jewish existence from the so-called 'Temple Mount Era'. . . . The location of the Temple Mount is in question. . . . It might be in Jericho or somewhere else.”

May 21, 2002

NEW YORK - Yasir Arafat has been circulating yet another bizarre allegation, claiming that the ancient Jewish Temple did not stand in Jerusalem, but rather in Nablus (Shechem).

Arafat made the allegation during the July 2000 Camp David talks, according to U.S. envoy Dennis Ross, who was present when Arafat spoke. Ross has now revealed: “He did offer one new idea, which was that the Temple didn’t exist in Jerusalem, that it was in Nablus.” (Jerusalem Post, May 15, 2002)

Earlier statements by Arafat and other PA officials attempting to delegitimize Judaism and Jewish history:

* “Jews never had any connection to Jerusalem.” In a statement issued Dec. 10, 1997, the PA’s Ministry of Information claimed that archaeological excavations in the Old City have found “Umayyad Islamic palaces, Roman ruins, Armenian ruins and others, but nothing Jewish.” The Ministry also falsely claimed that “there is no tangible evidence of any Jewish traces/remains in the old city of Jerusalem and its immediate vicinity.”

* “The Tombs of Rachel and Joseph are actually Muslim sites.” The PA newspaper Al-Hayat Al-Jadidah published an article in its issue of Dec. 1, 1997, which declared: “I call to be alert and to treat the Tomb of Joseph and the Tomb of Rachel as dunams of Palestinian land which must be liberated, and to treat Joseph and Rachel as just two people who died, like anyone else who dies.”


Forget the Temple Mount - you want me to take these people seriously for peace talks?

Anonymous said...

This is indeed good dialogue, I am grateful for your careful responses.
You open the door to me on a subject that volumes have been written about. This comment section can hardly do it justice. I would say firstly, where is his tomb? I would suggest this site: http://www.doxa.ws/Jesus_pages/Talmud_JC.html And, I would refer your excellent research skills to the works of Dr. Simon Greenleaf, who held the Royal Professorship of Law at Harvard. He was a
skeptic, often mocking the Christians in his classes. One day they challenged him to take the three volumes he had written on the laws of legal evidence and apply them to the resurrection. After much persuasion he did that. In the process he became a Christian and went on to write a book about his search. Greenleaf
came to the conclusion that the resurrection of Jesus Christ is one of the best established events in history according to the laws of legal evidence.
Josh McDowell has also written several volumes on the historical proofs of the life death and resurrection of Jesus. Are you telling me you have not explored and researched this subject?
In regards to your cited quotes, I agree, the statements are good hogwash, and typical of the low-ball tactics in this conflict. However, I would refer you to the Proverbs of Solomon for wisdom on how to proceed. "The one who conceals hatred has lying lips, The one who utters slander is fool" 10:18 and "Whoever belittles his neighbor lacks sense, but a man of understanding remains silent" 11:12
The core issue is not the attacks of historical veracity, but the attitudes of the heart. Palestinians hate the Jews, and vice versa. You do not see each other as neighbors. It is evident in the way you blog about 'these people' and in the way Arabs where we live seethe at 'those Jews.' The conflict will continue unless key people such as yourself, start taking a posture of humility, and lead into reconciliation with the conviction that you'll maintain integrity, no matter what the other side says or does. That is of course if you want peace?